On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Making NAT look silly is good. One case I see where IPv6 NAT still doesn't > look completely silly is where ISPs hand out /64s to end users. Pay your > EUR10, buy your IPv6NAT and you have a /48.
Well, this is still a case we can "fix" with a bridge-like ND-proxy. The question is whether it will make the problem worse.. Substitute the /64 with /128 and you make it really enticing. Not much we can do about it, except just try to say why it's such a bad idea. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 17 July 2003 11:16 > > > > Once we have such a thing, we can make positive > > requirements for exploiting it that make NAT look silly. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
